SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A display in support of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is set up in front of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he is currently living under political asylum. (Photo: Marshall24/flickr/cc)
In Turnaround, Swedish Supreme Court to Hear Assange Appeal
Lawyers for WikiLeaks founder say behavior of prosecutors is violation of rights
Mar 11, 2015
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on Tuesday was granted a hearing with the Swedish Supreme Court, where his lawyers will appeal to lift an arrest warrant against the whistleblower which has kept him confined to the Ecuadorian embassy in London under political asylum since June 2012.
Assange has repeatedly argued that extradition to Sweden will allow him to be sent to the U.S., where he faces espionage and conspiracy charges for his role in publishing a cache of military and State Department documents in 2010. Former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning is currently serving 35 years in prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas for her part in the leak.
Assange has also said that his confinement to the embassy, now approaching three years, is a violation of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees fundamental liberty and security of person.
The court's decision on Tuesday was a turnaround from a previous appeal court ruling in November, which found that lifting the warrant would risk allowing Assange to flee legal proceedings and that his confinement to the embassy was self-imposed.
The arrest warrant against Assange stems from sexual assault allegations in Sweden, although he has not been formally indicted with any crime. Marianne Ny, the prosecuting attorney in the case, has repeatedly denied requests to interview Assange at the embassy, which observers say may have been the catalyst for changing legal opinion in Sweden on Assange's fears of extradition.
In its decision on Tuesday, the court remarked on "the issue of the conduct of investigations and the principle of proportionality."
Earlier this month, government documents acquired by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) through a Freedom of Information Act request revealed that the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice are continuing an "ongoing criminal investigation of WikiLeaks."
In response to the ruling, WikiLeaks wrote on Twitter:
\u201cNote that our US case continues and the UK says they will arrest #Assange anyway, even if the Swedish extradition warrant drops.\u201d— WikiLeaks (@WikiLeaks) 1426010735
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on Tuesday was granted a hearing with the Swedish Supreme Court, where his lawyers will appeal to lift an arrest warrant against the whistleblower which has kept him confined to the Ecuadorian embassy in London under political asylum since June 2012.
Assange has repeatedly argued that extradition to Sweden will allow him to be sent to the U.S., where he faces espionage and conspiracy charges for his role in publishing a cache of military and State Department documents in 2010. Former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning is currently serving 35 years in prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas for her part in the leak.
Assange has also said that his confinement to the embassy, now approaching three years, is a violation of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees fundamental liberty and security of person.
The court's decision on Tuesday was a turnaround from a previous appeal court ruling in November, which found that lifting the warrant would risk allowing Assange to flee legal proceedings and that his confinement to the embassy was self-imposed.
The arrest warrant against Assange stems from sexual assault allegations in Sweden, although he has not been formally indicted with any crime. Marianne Ny, the prosecuting attorney in the case, has repeatedly denied requests to interview Assange at the embassy, which observers say may have been the catalyst for changing legal opinion in Sweden on Assange's fears of extradition.
In its decision on Tuesday, the court remarked on "the issue of the conduct of investigations and the principle of proportionality."
Earlier this month, government documents acquired by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) through a Freedom of Information Act request revealed that the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice are continuing an "ongoing criminal investigation of WikiLeaks."
In response to the ruling, WikiLeaks wrote on Twitter:
\u201cNote that our US case continues and the UK says they will arrest #Assange anyway, even if the Swedish extradition warrant drops.\u201d— WikiLeaks (@WikiLeaks) 1426010735
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on Tuesday was granted a hearing with the Swedish Supreme Court, where his lawyers will appeal to lift an arrest warrant against the whistleblower which has kept him confined to the Ecuadorian embassy in London under political asylum since June 2012.
Assange has repeatedly argued that extradition to Sweden will allow him to be sent to the U.S., where he faces espionage and conspiracy charges for his role in publishing a cache of military and State Department documents in 2010. Former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning is currently serving 35 years in prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas for her part in the leak.
Assange has also said that his confinement to the embassy, now approaching three years, is a violation of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees fundamental liberty and security of person.
The court's decision on Tuesday was a turnaround from a previous appeal court ruling in November, which found that lifting the warrant would risk allowing Assange to flee legal proceedings and that his confinement to the embassy was self-imposed.
The arrest warrant against Assange stems from sexual assault allegations in Sweden, although he has not been formally indicted with any crime. Marianne Ny, the prosecuting attorney in the case, has repeatedly denied requests to interview Assange at the embassy, which observers say may have been the catalyst for changing legal opinion in Sweden on Assange's fears of extradition.
In its decision on Tuesday, the court remarked on "the issue of the conduct of investigations and the principle of proportionality."
Earlier this month, government documents acquired by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) through a Freedom of Information Act request revealed that the FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice are continuing an "ongoing criminal investigation of WikiLeaks."
In response to the ruling, WikiLeaks wrote on Twitter:
\u201cNote that our US case continues and the UK says they will arrest #Assange anyway, even if the Swedish extradition warrant drops.\u201d— WikiLeaks (@WikiLeaks) 1426010735
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.